Term limits for Senate

I don't agree with term limits for the Senate or for Congress. If someone isn't doing a good job they can be voted out as easily as they can be voted in. There are many examples of fine senators who have served their states well for many years in addition to Senator Kennedy so let the voters decide. As far as the salary for life goes, I think that abolishing that perk would only serve to keep good people from running for public office. If you're away from your private profession for 2 or 4 years, there's no guarantee that you will be able to return, so some would see that as an unacceptable financial risk.

wlee I just had such a same discussion a few days ago, to include congress as well. If the presidency is locked to 8 years so should all other political offices. I also talked about the great expense in them being able to be paid and keep all their medical benefits for life. I also believe that congress should not be able to give their own raises, the should receive a 3 percent cola the same way as many in our country does.

Good topic! I'm leaning toward agreeing with you on the term limits...I think Ted Kennedy was a tremendous senator and we only benefited from having him in office so long, but for every Ted Kennedy we have a Strom Thurmond or a Robert Byrd who has clearly outstayed his welcome. The Senate does tend to stagnate for this reason. As for the lifetime salary, I'm torn. I really am. These people really are public servants, and they have the ability to effect change that will benefit Americans--and even people the world over--for generations. If they actually do, then I'm inclined to want to reward them for that. Of course, there is no way to guarantee that they will. And it is a ton of taxpayer money. If we had some kind of merit system perhaps it could be reserved for the senators with the highest performance, but that's so subjective I have no idea how we'd go about doing it.